7 research outputs found
Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis
The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic investigation plus meta-analysis into survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations using high-viscosity glass ionomers and to compare the results with those from the 2005 ART meta-analysis. Until February 2010, four databases were searched. Two hundred four publications were found, and 66 reported on ART restorations or sealant survival. Based on five exclusion criteria, two independent reviewers selected the 29 publications that accounted for the meta-analysis. Confidence intervals (CI) and or standard errors were calculated and the heterogeneity variance of the survival rates was estimated. Location (school/clinic) was an independent variable. The survival rates of single-surface and multiple-surface ART restorations in primary teeth over the first 2 years were 93% (CI, 91–94%) and 62% (CI, 51–73%), respectively; for single-surface ART restorations in permanent teeth over the first 3 and 5 years it was 85% (CI, 77–91%) and 80% (CI, 76–83%), respectively and for multiple-surface ART restorations in permanent teeth over 1 year it was 86% (CI, 59–98%). The mean annual dentine lesion incidence rate, in pits and fissures previously sealed using ART, over the first 3 years was 1%. No location effect and no differences between the 2005 and 2010 survival rates of ART restorations and sealants were observed. The short-term survival rates of single-surface ART restorations in primary and permanent teeth, and the caries-preventive effect of ART sealants were high. Clinical relevance: ART can safely be used in single-surface cavities in both primary and permanent teeth. ART sealants have a high caries preventive effect
A 2-year clinical study of two glass ionomer cements used in the atrumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique
The purpose of the study was to evaluate, in a clinical study over 2 years, the deterioration of two glass ionomer cements used with the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique or approach. Fifty-five Fuji IX and 45 ChemFil Superior restorations were placed randomly in 23 adult patients, mainly in small occlusal preparations in molar teeth. The restorations were placed in a dental hospital by one dentist using the ART technique. Photographs, radiographs and replicas were obtained at baseline and subsequent recalls. Both cements were easy to mix and place, but the radiolucency of ChemFil Superior was a disadvantage. Both cements also showed early high losses of sealant and restorative material. After 2 years, 34.5% of the sealants appeared to be completely lost, with caries recorded in 5.3% of the exposed fissures. In some instances, these small lesions may have been present, but not detected clinically, at the time of sealing. Restoration failures of 7.0% were from wear and fracture of the cements and recurrent caries. Mean cumulative wear was 83.1 microm for Fuji IX and 104.0 microm for ChemFil Superior, which was not statistically significant. The cements became darker after their placement to more closely match the restored teeth, but there were few exact matches. There was no surface staining and only minor marginal discrepancies and staining associated with the restorations. Although the short-term clinical performance of the two glass ionomer cements was reasonable, the materials require further improvements in their mechanical properties, to reduce sealant losses and wear. The cements evaluated appear suitable for restricted use only, in posterior teeth
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment with Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Material: Short-Term Results of a Pilot Study
Relationship between bacterial infection and evaluation using a laser fluorescence device, DIAGNOdent
Clinical evaluation of multisurface ART restorations Avaliação clĂnica de restaurações compostas ou complexas com a tĂ©cnica do ART
The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of two different glass-ionomer cements: a high-density (Ketac Molar - ESPE) and a resin-modified cement (Fuji VIII - GC) using the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment technique to restore multisurface cavities in permanent teeth. A total of 60 ART restorations (30 with each material) were placed in schoolchildren (9-16 years of age) by two operators. After a period of 6 months, two independent examiners evaluated 59 restorations according to the criteria used in previous ART studies. Data were submitted to McNemar and Fischer tests. The success rate of the treatment was 98.3%. One restoration (Ketac Molar) was replaced by another material and was recorded as failure. The success rates of the restorations were 100% and 96.6% for Fuji VIII and Ketac Molar, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the restorations success between baseline and 6 months (p>0.05). In the same way, no significant differences were found between materials, cavity types or operators (p>0.05). The ART approach was highly appropriate and effective in restorations involving two or more tooth surfaces, after 6 months. The results showed a promising performance of the ART technique with both materials.<br>O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o comportamento de dois cimentos de ionĂ´mero de vidro: um de alta viscosidade (Ketac Molar - ESPE) e um modificado por resina (Fuji VIII - GC) em restaurações envolvendo duas ou mais superfĂcies dentárias, confeccionadas pela tĂ©cnica do Tratamento Restaurador Atraumático. Sessenta restaurações (30 com cada material) foram inseridas em estudantes (9-16 anos) por dois operadores. ApĂłs 6 meses, dois examinadores independentes avaliaram as restaurações de acordo com os critĂ©rios utilizados em trabalhos prĂ©vios semelhantes. Os dados foram analisados pelos testes de McNemar e Fischer. A porcentagem de sucesso do tratamento foi de 98,3%. Uma restauração (Ketac Molar) foi substituĂda por outro material e classificada como falha. As porcentagens de sucesso das restaurações foram de 100% e 96,6% para o Fuji VIII e Ketac Molar, respectivamente. NĂŁo houve diferença estatisticamente significante no sucesso das restaurações entre o baseline e 6 meses (p>0,05). Da mesma forma, nĂŁo houve diferença estatĂstica entre os materiais, tipos de cavidade ou entre operadores.(p>0,05). A tĂ©cnica ART foi altamente apropriada e efetiva em restaurações envolvendo duas ou mais superfĂcies, apĂłs 6 meses. Os resultados mostraram um comportamento promissor com ambos os materiais